Neurocognitive Symptoms and Impairment in an HIV Community Clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neurocognitive impairment is a frequent complication of HIV infection and heralds a poor survival prognosis. With the availability of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), survival times for HIV-infected patients have markedly increased although the effects of HAART on the prevalence of neurocognitive impairment remain uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between self-reported neurocognitive symptoms and neuropsychological (NP) performance together with the impact of HAART among HIV-infected patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed in which patients without previously documented neurocognitive impairment attending an HIV community clinic were questioned about neurocognitive symptoms and a NP test battery was administered. RESULTS: Of the eighty-three patients examined, neurocognitive symptoms were reported by 34% of patients and were associated with a shorter duration of HAART and higher viral loads. Patients reporting neurocognitive symptoms were also more likely to exhibit impaired NP performance (p<0.005) with NP impairment being detected in 46% of all patients examined (12% with HIV-associated dementia). Neuropsychological impairment was directly correlated with age (p<0.001), plasma viral load (p<0.005) and inversely correlated with the number of prescribed antiretroviral drugs (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that neurocognitive symptoms are predictive of impaired NP performance and that NP impairment remains a frequent finding among older patients with higher viral loads. An increased number of antiretroviral drugs may be neuroprotective.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".